IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v130y2025i5d10.1007_s11192-025-05313-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring citation diversity in scholarly literature: an entropy-based approach

Author

Listed:
  • Suchismita Banerjee

    (S. N. Bose National Centre for Basic Science
    Indian Statistical Institute)

  • Abhik Ghosh

    (Indian Statistical Institute)

  • Banasri Basu

    (Indian Statistical Institute)

Abstract

This study explores the citation diversity in scholarly literature, analyzing different patterns of citations observed within different countries and academic disciplines. We examine citation distributions across top institutions within certain countries and find that the higher end of the distribution follows a Power Law or Pareto Law pattern; the scaling exponent of the Pareto Law varies depending on the number of top institutions included in the analysis. By adopting a novel entropy-based diversity measure, our findings reveal that countries with both small and large economies tend to cluster similarly in terms of citation diversity. The composition of countries within each group changes as the number of top institutions considered in the analysis varies. Moreover, we analyze citation diversity among award-winning scientists across six scientific disciplines, finding significant variations. We also explore the evolution of citation diversity over the past century across multiple fields. A gender-based study in several disciplines confirms varying citation diversities among male and female scientists. Our innovative citation diversity measure stands out as a valuable tool for assessing the unevenness of citation distributions, providing deeper insights that go beyond what traditional citation counts alone can reveal. This comprehensive analysis enhances our understanding of global scientific contributions and fosters a more equitable view of academic achievements.

Suggested Citation

  • Suchismita Banerjee & Abhik Ghosh & Banasri Basu, 2025. "Exploring citation diversity in scholarly literature: an entropy-based approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 130(5), pages 2673-2704, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:130:y:2025:i:5:d:10.1007_s11192-025-05313-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-025-05313-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-025-05313-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-025-05313-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shorrocks, A F, 1980. "The Class of Additively Decomposable Inequality Measures," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(3), pages 613-625, April.
    2. Charles J. Gomez & Andrew C. Herman & Paolo Parigi, 2022. "Leading countries in global science increasingly receive more citations than other countries doing similar research," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 6(7), pages 919-929, July.
    3. Suchismita Banerjee & Soumyajyoti Biswas & Bikas K. Chakrabarti & Sai Krishna Challagundla & Asim Ghosh & Suhaas Reddy Guntaka & Hanesh Koganti & Anvesh Reddy Kondapalli & Raju Maiti & Manipushpak Mit, 2023. "Evolutionary dynamics of social inequality and coincidence of Gini and Kolkata indices under unrestricted competition," International Journal of Modern Physics C (IJMPC), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 34(04), pages 1-29, April.
    4. Juan A Crespo & Yungrong Li & Javier Ruiz–Castillo, 2013. "The Measurement of the Effect on Citation Inequality of Differences in Citation Practices across Scientific Fields," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(3), pages 1-9, March.
    5. Alexis-Michel Mugabushaka & Anthi Kyriakou & Theo Papazoglou, 2016. "Bibliometric indicators of interdisciplinarity: the potential of the Leinster–Cobbold diversity indices to study disciplinary diversity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(2), pages 593-607, May.
    6. Yongli Li & Guijie Zhang & Yuqiang Feng & Chong Wu, 2015. "An entropy-based social network community detecting method and its application to scientometrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 1003-1017, January.
    7. S. Redner, 1998. "How popular is your paper? An empirical study of the citation distribution," The European Physical Journal B: Condensed Matter and Complex Systems, Springer;EDP Sciences, vol. 4(2), pages 131-134, July.
    8. Andy Stirling, 2007. "A General Framework for Analysing Diversity in Science, Technology and Society," SPRU Working Paper Series 156, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    9. Aisling J. Daly & Jan M. Baetens & Bernard De Baets, 2018. "Ecological Diversity: Measuring the Unmeasurable," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 6(7), pages 1-28, July.
    10. R. Rajaram & B. Castellani & A. N. Wilson, 2017. "Advancing Shannon Entropy for Measuring Diversity in Systems," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2017, pages 1-10, May.
    11. Leydesdorff, Loet & Wagner, Caroline S. & Bornmann, Lutz, 2019. "Interdisciplinarity as diversity in citation patterns among journals: Rao-Stirling diversity, relative variety, and the Gini coefficient," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 255-269.
    12. Loet Leydesdorff, 2002. "Indicators of structural change in the dynamics of science: Entropy statistics of the SCI Journal Citation Reports," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 53(1), pages 131-159, January.
    13. Nsakanda, Aaron Luntala & Price, Wilson L. & Diaby, Moustapha & Gravel, Marc, 2007. "Ensuring population diversity in genetic algorithms: A technical note with application to the cell formation problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 178(2), pages 634-638, April.
    14. Tam'as S. Bir'o & Zolt'an N'eda, 2020. "Gintropy: Gini index based generalization of Entropy," Papers 2007.04829, arXiv.org.
    15. Isidro F. Aguillo & Judit Bar-Ilan & Mark Levene & José Luis Ortega, 2010. "Comparing university rankings," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 85(1), pages 243-256, October.
    16. Deming Lin & Tianhui Gong & Wenbin Liu & Martin Meyer, 2020. "An entropy-based measure for the evolution of h index research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2283-2298, December.
    17. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Anastasiia Soldatenkova, 2016. "The dispersion of the citation distribution of top scientists’ publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 1711-1724, December.
    18. Amalia Mas-Bleda & Mike Thelwall & Kayvan Kousha & Isidro F. Aguillo, 2014. "Do highly cited researchers successfully use the social web?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 337-356, October.
    19. Dong, Ke & Wu, Jiang & Wang, Kaili, 2021. "On the inequality of citation counts of all publications of individual authors," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Shiji Chen & Yanhui Song & Fei Shu & Vincent Larivière, 2022. "Interdisciplinarity and impact: the effects of the citation time window," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(5), pages 2621-2642, May.
    2. Alfonso Ávila-Robinson & Cristian Mejia & Shintaro Sengoku, 2021. "Are bibliometric measures consistent with scientists’ perceptions? The case of interdisciplinarity in research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(9), pages 7477-7502, September.
    3. Hongyu Zhou & Raf Guns & Tim C. E. Engels, 2022. "Are social sciences becoming more interdisciplinary? Evidence from publications 1960–2014," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(9), pages 1201-1221, September.
    4. Chen, Shiji & Qiu, Junping & Arsenault, Clément & Larivière, Vincent, 2021. "Exploring the interdisciplinarity patterns of highly cited papers," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1).
    5. Giulio Giacomo Cantone, 2024. "How to measure interdisciplinary research? A systemic design for the model of measurement," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(8), pages 4937-4982, August.
    6. Shiji Chen & Yanan Guo & Alvin Shijie Ding & Yanhui Song, 2024. "Is interdisciplinarity more likely to produce novel or disruptive research?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(5), pages 2615-2632, May.
    7. Sander Zwanenburg & Maryam Nakhoda & Peter Whigham, 2022. "Toward greater consistency and validity in measuring interdisciplinarity: a systematic and conceptual evaluation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 7769-7788, December.
    8. Loet Leydesdorff & Inga Ivanova, 2021. "The measurement of “interdisciplinarity” and “synergy” in scientific and extra‐scientific collaborations," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 72(4), pages 387-402, April.
    9. Maryam Nakhoda & Peter Whigham & Sander Zwanenburg, 2023. "Quantifying and addressing uncertainty in the measurement of interdisciplinarity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(11), pages 6107-6127, November.
    10. Hackett, Edward J. & Leahey, Erin & Parker, John N. & Rafols, Ismael & Hampton, Stephanie E. & Corte, Ugo & Chavarro, Diego & Drake, John M. & Penders, Bart & Sheble, Laura & Vermeulen, Niki & Vision,, 2021. "Do synthesis centers synthesize? A semantic analysis of topical diversity in research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    11. Biró, Tamás S. & Telcs, András & Józsa, Máté & Néda, Zoltán, 2023. "Gintropic scaling of scientometric indexes," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 618(C).
    12. Yury Dranev & Maxim Kotsemir & Boris Syomin, 2018. "Diversity of research publications: relation to agricultural productivity and possible implications for STI policy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 1565-1587, September.
    13. Lina Xu & Steven Dellaportas & Zhiqiang Yang & Jin Wang, 2023. "More on the relationship between interdisciplinary accounting research and citation impact," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 63(4), pages 4779-4803, December.
    14. Ruz, Soumendra Nath, 2023. "Amazing aspects of inequality indices (Gini and Kolkata Index) of COVID-19 confirmed cases in India," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 632(P2).
    15. Lu Huang & Yijie Cai & Erdong Zhao & Shengting Zhang & Yue Shu & Jiao Fan, 2022. "Measuring the interdisciplinarity of Information and Library Science interactions using citation analysis and semantic analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(11), pages 6733-6761, November.
    16. Wolfgang Glänzel & Koenraad Debackere, 2022. "Various aspects of interdisciplinarity in research and how to quantify and measure those," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(9), pages 5551-5569, September.
    17. Xiaolan Wu & Chengzhi Zhang, 2019. "Finding high-impact interdisciplinary users based on friend discipline distribution in academic social networking sites," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(2), pages 1017-1035, May.
    18. Kim, Hyeyoung & Park, Hyelin & Song, Min, 2022. "Developing a topic-driven method for interdisciplinarity analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    19. Rüdiger Mutz, 2022. "Diversity and interdisciplinarity: Should variety, balance and disparity be combined as a product or better as a sum? An information-theoretical and statistical estimation approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 7397-7414, December.
    20. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Flavia Costa, 2017. "Specialization versus diversification in research activities: the extent, intensity and relatedness of field diversification by individual scientists," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(3), pages 1403-1418, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:130:y:2025:i:5:d:10.1007_s11192-025-05313-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.